Question

Give reasons why you believe that states might have been right not to obey the

national government in the early history of America. Would your reasons still be
valid for our society today?

Answer 1

Early American states may have resisted obeying the national government due to beliefs in sovereignty and states' rights, local priorities over national concerns, and regional differences, such as attitudes toward slavery. However, the reasons that were valid in the early days of the Republic would not be deemed acceptable in modern American society, which values a strong federal system.

Step-by-step explanation:

In the early history of America, states might have felt justified in not obeying the national government for several reasons. The concept of sovereignty holds that a group has the right to be free of outside interference, and this principle was deeply ingrained in the values of early Americans. During the times of the Articles of Confederation and early years of the Constitution, there was a strong sentiment for states' rights. Patrick Henry, a prominent figure, feared the new federal powers and believed in the preservation of states' rights especially regarding taxation.

Additionally, the early United States was more of a collection of distinct communities with their own interests. National issues took a backseat to local concerns, and as a result, states valued their autonomy over following federal mandates. Ideological differences, particularly regarding slavery, also played a significant role, with Southern states favoring a weak central government to maintain their slave economies, while Northern states advocated for a stronger federal government that could potentially eliminate slavery.

While these reasons might have been compelling at the time, in modern society, the dynamics have shifted significantly. Today, a strong federal system ensures universal rights, efficiency in nation-wide governance, and the ability to handle issues that transcend state borders. Hence, the reasons for non-compliance with the national government in the early days of the Republic are not considered valid or justifiable in our contemporary society.

Answer 2

There were numerous reasons for the limitations of the national government under the Articles of Confederation. Congress had difficulty passing laws because a vote of 9 of the 13 states was needed to pass important measures. Additionally, without a president or an executive branch, there were no officials to make certain that the laws passed by Congress were carried out. Without national courts, there were no means of interpreting the laws or judging those who broke them.

Furthermore, changing the Articles of Confederation to make the national government stronger was difficult. Changes in the Articles required an undivided vote of all 13 states.

Another limitation of the new government was that Congress lacked the authority to collect taxes. Congress could ask the states to contribute money to pay the national government's expenses. Yet it had no warrant to force states to make these contributions.

Without money, Congress could not pay the country's debts or carry on any government activities that might be needed. Congress also could not compensate the soldiers who had fought in the Revolutionary War. These limitations impaired relations with foreign nations and endangered America's national security.

Under the Articles of Confederation, the national government lacked other important powers. It could not control trade between the states or with foreign nations. Instead, each state devised its own trade practices. These practices resulted in many disputes among the states and with other countries. In addition, most of the states distributed their own money. There was no stable national currency or banking system.

As a result of these limitations, the states acted more like small, separate nations rather than members of a confederation. Further weakening the authority of the confederation, states often refused to obey the laws of Congress injuring further the relations between the states and Congress.

Step-by-step explanation: